Haryana

Ambala

CC/446/2017

Swaran Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

PNB - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

30 Aug 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

      Complaint Case No. : 446 of 2017

     Date of Institution    : 18.12.2017

       Date of Decision      : 30.08.2018.

 

Swaran Singh s/o Jiwa Singh r/o H.No.43, Ramdass Nagar, Ambala City, District Ambala (Haryana)

……Complainant

 

Versus

 

 

1.Punjab National Bank, Coastal Line, Ambala Cantt. (Near Kharka No.1 canteen) (Through its Branch Manager).

2.Chief Manager, P.N.B (CPPC) PNB House, Bank Square, Sector 17B, Chandigarh 160017 (through its Chief Manager)

3.Office of the Principal CDA Pension Allahabad (Through its Pr. C.D.A Pension).

……Opposite Parties.

 

 

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

BEFORE:   SH.D.N.ARORA, PRESIDENT.

                   SH.PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.

                  

Present:       Complainant in person.

                   Sh.Ashwani Chandra, counsel for the OP Nos. 1 & 2.                               OP No.3 exparte.

  

ORDER

 

                   Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant is ex-Serviceman from Indian Army and his pension is being drawn at OP No.1. The OP No.2 is main branch and the OP No.3 is distributing authority of pension of the complainant. The complainant had received PPO from OP No.3 in the month of July, 2017 with revised disability pension element for affecting payment as per PPO No.DE/CORR/11106/2017 corrigendum PPO No.DE/CORR/0410912014. Consequent upon GOI MOD letter No.12(16)/2009/D(Pen/Policy dated 15.09.2014) the disability element revised as under :

1. For    :Rs.310 Read: Rs.775 w.e.f.01/01/1996 to 14/09/1997 I.D-20% rounded off to 50 %
2. For    :Rs.310 Read:       Rs.775 w.e.f.22/07/2003 to 31/03/2004 I.D-20 % rounded off to 50 %
3. For    :Rs.465 Read:       Rs.1163 w.e.f.01.04.2014 to 31/12/2005 I.D-20 % rounded off to 50 %
4. For    :Rs.702 Read:       Rs.1775 w.e.f.01/01/2006 to I.D-20 % rounded off to 50 %

 

         

As per statement issued by OP No.1 payment mentioned above has been paid except Sr.no.(i) w.e.f.01/01/1996 to 21.07.2003 (total 90 months) @ 775-310 = difference Rs.465/- P.M.X90 months= total Rs.41850/- without any DA or others. The complainant requested the OP No.1 many a times to do the needful but to no effect and it refused to do the same on 10.12.2017.  The act and conduct of the OP clearly amounts to deficiency in service on their part. In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CA and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C6.

2.                          On notice OP Nos. 1 & 2 appeared and filed their joint reply wherein preliminary objections such as cause of action, concealment of material facts, maintainability and locus standi have been taken. The original pension or revised pension as per PPO issued by respondent No.3 vide corrigendum PPO No.DE/CORR/11106/17 for revision of disability element have already been paid to the complainant in his pension account No.4071000400126454. The arrear amounting to Rs.80202/- for serial Nos.(ii) to (iv) have been paid to the complainant on 28.11.2017 and the arrear amounting to 14.09.1997 i.e. approximately for 21 months have been paid to the complainant in his pension account on 30.12.2017. As per original PPO D/001394/1987 disability element was to be paid from 03.12.1987  to 14.09.1997. In another PP No.D/RA/13113/2003 was subsequently issued according to which disability pension was issued w.e.f. 22.07.2003 and no nothing is due to be paid by the OP No.1 & 2 to the complainant towards revised disability element. The complainant is drawing pension from the branch of Op Nos. 1 & 2 in account No. 4071000400126454. From 01.03.1986 to 02.09.2003 he was getting pension from DPDO. The disability pension of complainant has been revised and OP Nos. 1 & 2 paid the original/revised pension and the Op No.3 issued corr.PPO No.DE/CORR.11106/17 for revision of disability element and the PPO was received in the branch on 12.09.2017. The Op Nos. 1 & 2 have paid full arrears as per PPO No.DE/CORR/11106/17. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP Nos. 1 & 2. Other contentions have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. OP No.3 summoned through registered post but none had turned up on its behalf, therefore, it was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 02.02.2018. In evidence, the appearing OPs have tendered affidavit Annexure RA and document Annexure R1.

3.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record very carefully.

4.                Main grievance of the complainant that OP No.1 & 2 has credit the pension in his account very delayed because the PPO i.e. pension payment order was send to the OP No.2 on 30.06.2017 as per annexure C5 but complainant has received the amount of Rs.80202/- on 28.11.2017 and other arrears of Rs.9096 was also credit by the office of CPC, Chandigarh on 30.12.2017 in account of the complainant. Branch office i.e. 2 has send the above said amount after period of 3 months. This amount is to be paid by the OP No.1 & 2 after adopting all process upto September, 2017. The complainant is entitled the interest of the three months from October, to December @ 9 % from the date of the due payment till realization. on the other hand, counsel for the OP Nos. 1 & 2 has argued that in fact original pension payment order number DEO/CORR/111016/7 has been dispatched by the office of Senior Record for OIC record case of 56APO on 30.06.2017 sent to the PNB centralized processing centre side no.15 Feeorzpur Road, near West Mall, Ludhiana by OP No.3 and same was received by PNB Ludhiana Branch on 17.07.2017 as per Annexure C5 by Ludhiana Branch since this pension pay order was not related to Ludhiana branch and was returned back to the centralized processing centre Section 17B, Chandigarh and said office has received that POP on 12.09.2017 after processing at CPP Chandigarh as per Annexure C6. The same was sent to the branch of Punjab National Bank, Sadar, but account of the complainant is lying with the branch office PNB Castal Line Ambala Cantt. OP No.1. The above said POP (Pension payment order) was received by the OP No.1 in the second week of October, 2017 and calculation was sent to CPC, Chandigarh for approval after proper checking verification, CPPC Chandigarh has credit the amount of Rs.80202/- on 28.12.2017 in the account of the complainant after that arrear of Rs.9996/- also sent credit by the office of CPPC Chandigarh on 30.12.2017 in the account of the complainant and accordingly, branch office of OP No.1 has paid/released full arrear as per pension payment order NO.DE/COOR11106/07 there is no delay in making the payment on  the part of CPPC, Chandigarh OP No.2  or branch office of OP No.1. Hence, the complainant not entitled any interest as claimed by him from Op Nos.1& 2.

5.                          After hearing the arguments of the parties as per Annexure C5, C6 it is clear that pension payment order was wrongly sent by the office of Op No.3 to the Chief Manager PNB Centralized Processing Centre, Ludhiana and same was received by that branch on 17.07.2017 and returned back to the CPPC, Chandigarh on 12.09.2017 as per Annexure C5 and Annexure C6. After processing of the pension payment order for verification the amount has been rightly credit in the account of the complainant. There is no fault on the part of the OP No.1 & 2. So far deficiency in service on the part of OP No.3, no doubt OP No.3 has wrongly send the pension payment order to the Ludhiana Branch due to this reason complainant has received the amount in the month of November and December but the complainant has not hired the services of OP No.3 by paying any consideration which is a statutory body and not provided the services to the complainant, therefore, present complaint is hereby dismissed against OP No.3 on this ground only. However, complainant is at liberty to the complainant to approach appropriate Court/ Forum/ Commission on the same cause of action.  Exemption of time spent before this Forum is granted  in terms of the  judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled “ Laxmi Engineering Works versus PSG Industrial Institute  (1995) 3 SCC page 583. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced on: 30.08.2018                                           (D.N.ARORA)

                                                                                         PRESIDENT

 

         

                                                                       (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                        MEMBER